This link appears to still work:

https://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/DC%20MFP%202018.pdf

The issue is that the underserved kids aren’t from Ward 3, unless you were going to offer Landon-Maret PCS, of course.

Anonymous wrote:Charters aren't opening in Ward 3 because the PCSB isn't going to approve a school opening there because there are so few disadvantaged and at-risk students in Ward 3.

And that for the vast majority of charter schools the business model is to teach disadvantaged kids.

Charters aren't opening in Ward 3 because the PCSB isn't going to approve a school opening there because there are so few disadvantaged and at-risk students in Ward 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The supporters of keeping Old Hardy public have been using it to bash DME and DCPS as well.

The school-by-school demographic projections are pretty alarming and it's pretty damning that nothing substantive is being planned.

You mean the neighborhood growth data for specific schools? I thought this was supposed to be about citywide facilities planning strategies for public and charter schools. The recommendations are more about changing how planning is done.

Those Old Hardy people keep forgetting they're part of a an entire city. Some 75% of public students don't attend in-boundary schools, including the roughly 50% of all public students in charters.

Ward 3 has the second smallest public enrollment after Ward 2. If a couple of language immersion or STEM charters open in Ward 3, those neighborhood school class sizes could plummet.

Wilson and feeders are overcrowded, we get it. That is and should be of concern from a safety perspective. Temporary measures can address that. Remember, using trailers has not negatively impacted achievement in Ward 3 at schools like Mann, Key, etc.

Ward 3's problems are different from and, in some ways, the opposite of those in the rest of the city. Different, but not more important.

So what's your point?

If opening a couple of charters would solve crowding, wouldn't that be an appropriate use for Old Hardy? Charters can't open in Ward 3 for the same reason that DCPS can't add schools, there's no space.

I don't know what the solution to crowding is, but I don't see how giving away DCPS-owned buildings to private schools that mostly serve Virginia and Maryland kids is in any way a part of it.

Anonymous wrote:The supporters of keeping Old Hardy public have been using it to bash DME and DCPS as well.

The school-by-school demographic projections are pretty alarming and it's pretty damning that nothing substantive is being planned.

You mean the neighborhood growth data for specific schools? I thought this was supposed to be about citywide facilities planning strategies for public and charter schools. The recommendations are more about changing how planning is done.

Those Old Hardy people keep forgetting they're part of a an entire city. Some 75% of public students don't attend in-boundary schools, including the roughly 50% of all public students in charters.

Ward 3 has the second smallest public enrollment after Ward 2. If a couple of language immersion or STEM charters open in Ward 3, those neighborhood school class sizes could plummet.

Wilson and feeders are overcrowded, we get it. That is and should be of concern from a safety perspective. Temporary measures can address that. Remember, using trailers has not negatively impacted achievement in Ward 3 at schools like Mann, Key, etc.

Ward 3's problems are different from and, in some ways, the opposite of those in the rest of the city. Different, but not more important.

I suspect that if I put in a FOIA request for the supporting materials that led to those school-by-school projections, I would receive a box of fudge in the mail.

The supporters of keeping Old Hardy public have been using it to bash DME and DCPS as well.

The school-by-school demographic projections are pretty alarming and it's pretty damning that nothing substantive is being planned.

If you read it, the doc was lame as hell anyway. No real recommendations anyone who's dealt with DC education for more than an hour couldn't have thought of. Has anyone noticed that dual language education has parent interest or that transportation issues can make getting to school difficult?

My view was that the people who put it together are actually quite smart but were given direction to keep anything interesting or useful at all out of this. Which makes it unfortunate that money was ever spent for this purpose.

When the last version came out, the NEIGHBORHOOD student growth projections in the document were very, very useful to bash in heads at DCPS, DME, and in working with the Council. They needed to address growth and will continue to. You could point to it for questions like "where do you build/expand a school if Wilson is too crowded?" and not have to just shrug your shoulders when people offered BS answers like "Ward 2," (the home of very few DCPS high schoolers). But instead of usable data we get things like citywide cohort growth, when we know it's very uneven across DC.

Anonymous wrote:Lots of promises on budgets and school upgrades have disappeared.

It is also no longer being considered by the Council. Totally off the table. My hope is that this is signaling some real oversight on the Mayor's terrible handling of education in DC over the last few years.

Lots of promises on budgets and school upgrades have disappeared.

Included reference to the move of Banneker to Shaw. No allocation of budget for Shaw MS.

Here is the doc they removed for reference.
https://www.docdroid.net/ymgbqik/dc-public-education-master-facilities-plan-2018.pdf

Maybe related to Shaw/Banneker?

Just noticed this:
"The MFP report that was released in November is being revised and will be reposted shortly."
https://dme.dc.gov/MFP2018

Gone from here:
https://dme.dc.gov/publication/dc-public-education-master-facilities-plan-2018-full-report

Anyone know what's going on?